On Thursday, the Senate Governance & Finance Committee and the Senate Elections & Constitutional Amendments Committee held a joint informational hearing in Los Angeles to discuss two potential changes in the composition of county governments – enlarging the membership of Boards of Supervisors, and having elected County Executives. Much of these policy discussions are driven by the size of several large counties, including Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, and Riverside Counties, whereby each County Supervisor can represent nearly a million people.

More recently, a report issued by the Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury called on the county to increase the membership of the Board of Supervisors by 6 seats to more adequately represent the constituency, although several previous attempts to enlarge the Los Angeles County Board have failed. The other focal point of the committee hearing was a discussion about having an elected County Chief Executive Officer. Patterned after the way Mayors are elected in cities, the belief is this model would split the current executive and legislative function of the Board of Supervisors, and better manage the day-to-day operations of counties. While there are strong arguments on both sides of the issue, there was significant discussion over the elected County Chief Executive Officer responsibilities, suggesting that opposition could subside under a carefully-crated governance structure.

Last year the Legislature considered Senate Constitutional Amendment 8 (Mendoza) which would have, upon approval of the state’s voters, enlarged the Board of Supervisors in counties over 3 million residents. This measure failed to receive the necessary 2/3rds vote to place on the ballot, with several Legislators questioning the appropriateness of voters statewide determining local governance structures of other jurisdictions. Senator Tony Mendoza (D-Artesia) announced he will introduce a new measure on this issue early in the upcoming legislative session.

This week, the 2016 Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment Report (2016 Needs Assessment) was unveiled, finding that California’s local streets and roads pavement conditions have continued to deteriorate, siting a statewide average Pavement Condition Index of 65, placing these systems in the “at risk” category. The 2016 Needs Assessment identifies a transportation funding shortfall of roughly $73 billion in additional revenue over the next ten-years just to bring and maintain pavement conditions at a state of good repair.

Further, the 2016 Needs Assessment, prepared by the California State Association of Counties and the League of California Cities, indicates that 52 counties have pavement conditions that are either “at risk” or in “poor condition.” During the 2016 Legislative Session, a transportation funding and reform package was put forth; however, it has not moved forward due to a lack support from a 2/3rds majority in both houses of the Legislature. Capitol observers suggest the Legislature could return for a Special Session on Transportation shortly after the General Election. The Special Session would need to complete its work at the end of November 2016. The 2016 Needs Assessment can be accessed here.

A report issued this week by the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) estimates that California’s housing supply has fallen several million homes short of meeting current demands on a per capita basis, siting undersupply as the root cause of rising home and rental prices.

The MGI report recommends that the State build roughly 3.5 million homes by 2025. To help close this housing gap, MGI recommends 15 policy solutions primarily focused on local land use decisions, total cost of construction, and the role of the State to address housing production. The complete list of recommendations and full report details can be accessed here.

On Monday, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court ruling against a National Marine Fisheries Service (Service) decision to list bearded seals as threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (Act) due to future impacts of climate change. The lawsuit, which was filed by the State of Alaska and several industry groups which will be impacted by the listing and resulting critical habitat designations, was originally ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in a lower court in 2014.

The original listing was based on the Service’s assertion that climate change will result in imminent loss of polar sea ice, necessary habitat for the seals, which will lead to a population decline in the species by the year 2095. However, there is no current decline in the seal population’s numbers, and opponents of the listing have cited a lack of scientific basis and evidence for the action. While the listing has no immediate impact on California, the ruling sets a distinct precedent going forward for federal agencies to use speculative information about extremely long-term, future impacts of climate change on species and to propose listing those species under the Act without any actual current decline in population.

Earlier this week, RCRC and CSAC staff presented at the California County Information Directors Association (CCISDA) fall conference in the City of Industry. At the Board meeting Wednesday, RCRC and CSAC reviewed the 2015-2016 Legislative cycle and presented on what to expect in the upcoming year.

RCRC and CSAC staff also discussed creating a formal structure for collaboration between the organizations in the next legislative session to ensure that legislation that presents Information Technology impacts to county administration is discussed at the local level.

RCRC also attended the Small/Rural Counties Meeting on Sunday to discuss continued collaboration with that committee.

CCSIDA is an organization of county information technology Directors and Chief Information Officers representing all 58 California counties.

The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has released draft language to amend the Safety Element of the General Plan Guidelines to meet the requirements of Senate Bill 379 (Jackson, 2016). SB 379 requires cities and counties to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies in their next revision to either their local hazard mitigation plan (on or after January 1,2017) or their Safety Element of the General Plan (on or before January 1 2011) considering the advice provided by OPR in their General Plan Guidelines.

There will be two webinars to explain the changes to the Safety Element and provide public comment. The Draft Safety Element of the General Plan Guidelines and webinar registration information can be accessed here.

The California Water Plan Update 2018 (Water Plan) Policy Advisory Committee (Committee) held its inaugural meeting in Sacramento this week. RCRC, as a member of the twenty-eight member board, attended the meeting which provided a very broad framework for the Plan as it moves forward in the months ahead with a scheduled completion date of December 2018.

The Water Plan Review Draft includes chapters on a vision of water management in California; water management assessments including effectiveness, tracking and reporting as well as challenges; short and long term recommendations and priorities on both a statewide and regional scale; a finance plan to identify potential revenue sources, and lastly, an implentation plan.

While the last iteration, the Update 2013 was over 3,000 pages, it is the intent to create a much more succinct and focused Water Plan that is around 150 pages in length. Based on discussion at the Committee meeting, it is clear that the Administration’s California Water Action Plan, Integrated Regional Water Management and Sustainable Groundwater Management will all be center stage in the upcoming Water Plan.

The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is in the middle of a series of public meetings seeking recommendations on how to make drinking water affordable for low-income Californians. The public is invited to come forward with their ideas about how to develop and implement a statewide low-income rate assistance program, including sharing examples of existing programs. The outreach is a direct result of the passage of Assembly Bill 401 (2015, Dodd) which requires the SWRCB to release a plan for this statewide initiative no later than February 1, 2018.

The next two public meetings are scheduled for November 7, 2016 at the East Bay Municipal Utility District in Oakland, and November 9, 2016 at the Junior League Community Center in Bakersfield. Both meetings are scheduled from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.

The Allied Healthcare Loan Repayment Program (AHLRP), which is administered by the California Office of State Health Planning and Development (OSHDP), has been expanded to target healthcare professionals in County Medical Services Program (CMSP) counties. The purpose of the program is to increase the number of healthcare professionals in medically underserved areas. Eligible applicants may receive loan repayments of up to $16,000 per year in exchange for a one-year service obligation at a qualifying CMSP facility or clinic in any of the CMSP designated counties.

On November 14, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. a dedication ceremony is being held in the City of Redding for the Richard “Dick” Dickerson Memorial Highway. Dick Dickerson served as a Shasta County Supervisor from 1993 to 1998. As part of his service as a Shasta County Supervisor, Dickerson served on the RCRC Board of Directors, and served as Chair in 1998. Dickerson went on to serve in the State Assembly from 1998 to 2002.

After leaving the State Assembly, Dickerson was elected to the City Council of Redding. Dickerson died in Redding in September of 2014 after several months of illness.

With the enactment last year of Assembly Concurrent Resolution 53, authored by Assembly Member Brian Dahle (R-Lassen), a portion of State Highway 44 is being dedicated in the City of Redding. Full details on the ceremony can be accessed here.

There is some indication that the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) may move during the upcoming Congressional lame duck session. House and Senate staff started talking last week to try and work out some of the issues between the respective versions of the bills, although neither the House nor the Senate has named official conferees as of yet.

It is our understanding that House Democrats are at the table and are participating in discussions, largely due to an interest in how or if the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is addressed, since its removal from the House committee-passed bill before floor consideration. The larger discussions are around Title VII of the Senate bill (dealing with clean and drinking water) which is typically outside the scope of the WRDA bill. While encouraging that all parties are talking, it is likely that a final WRDA bill will not be done until sometime in December. WRDA could be one of the last items addressed in the lame duck.

RCRC members are encouraged to submit comments on regulatory matters to state and federal regulatory bodies, and to provide a copy to RCRC’s Government Affairs staff. Click “Read More” to access information related to the current status of regulations impacting California’s rural counties.

Proposed Pesticide Use Near School Sites Regulation. While current regulatory requirements for pesticide applications near schools vary from county to county, the proposed regulation will provide minimum statewide standards for all agricultural pesticide applications near public K-12 schools and child day care facilities. The proposed regulation will require growers to notify public K-12 schools, child day care facilities, and county agricultural commissioners when certain pesticide applications made for the production of an agricultural commodity near a school site are planned in the coming year, and again a few days prior to the applications. In addition, certain pesticide applications near these school sites will be prohibited at certain times. Agency: Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) Status: Proposed regulations were released in September 2016, with public comments now due December 9, 2016. There are three public hearings scheduled for November 15, 16, and December 9, 2016 in Oxnard, Tulare, and Salinas, respectively. The public notice with public hearing time and location details and the draft regulations can be accessed here. RCRC Comments: Staff is seeking input from member counties. RCRC Advocate: Mary Pitto mpitto@rcrcnet.org

Amendments to the Portable Engine ATCM and the PERP. Revisions to the Portable Engine Airborne Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) and the Statewide Portable Equipment Registration Program Regulation (PERO) are being proposed. The current ATCM requires subject fleets of engines to meet a series of fleet average emission standards for diesel particulate matter (DPM). The ATCM fleet standards became effective in 2013 and become more stringent in 2017 and 2020. Compliance with the future fleet requirements are projected to be very difficult. The proposed amendments include alternatives to the current fleet averages to protect public health while considering economic impacts to regulated fleets. Agency: Air Resources Board (ARB) Status: Draft regulations dated September 9, 2016, with a public workshop on November 10, 2016. These proposed regulations are anticipated to be released in early 2017, and considered at the March 2017 ARB public meeting. The public workshop notice and draft regulations can be accessed here. RCRC Comments: Staff is seeking input from member counties. RCRC Advocate: Mary Pitto mpitto@rcrcnet.org

California Carpet Stewardship Plan 2017-2021. The Carpet America Recovery Effort (CARE) has submitted a new Carpet Stewardship Plan (Plan) for approval. The purpose of the Plan is to increase the amount of postconsumer carpet diverted from landfills through recycling into secondary products. Agency: CalRecycle Status: Report posted October 18, 2016, with public comments due November 14, 2016. This new Plan will be considered at the December 20, 2016 CalRecycle public meeting. RCRC Comments: Staff is seeking input from member counties. The Plan can be accessed here. RCRC Advocate: Mary Pitto mpitto@rcrcnet.org

Update to the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (Proposed CalEnviroScreen 3.0). The CalEnviroScreen uses a suite of statewide indicators and assigns scores for each indicator in a given geographic area (census tracts). Scores for the pollution burden and population characteristics categories are then multiplied together. The intent of this tool is to provide State agencies with a means to prioritize and direct their resources and make policy decisions intended to benefit the most impacted communities. This latest update incorporates recent data for nearly all indicators, improvements in the way some indicators are calculated, and two new indicators – cardiovascular disease and rent-adjusted income. The update also includes additional information on pollution sources in Mexico. The tool precludes 30 counties (27 RCRC counties) from being defined as having any “Disadvantaged Communities.” Agency: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Status: Draft released September 6, 2016, with public comments due October 21, 2016. Draft proposal and related documents can be accessed here. RCRC Comments: Click here. RCRC Advocates: Mary Pitto mpitto@rcrcnet.org and Staci Heaton sheaton@rcrcnet.org

Draft Safety Element Update of the General Plan Guidelines. The draft Safety Element to the General Plan Guidelines implements Senate Bill 379 (Jackson, 2015) and incorporates climate change adaptation and resilience in the Safety Element of the General Plan Guidelines. Agency: The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Status: Draft language released October 24, 2016, with comments due by November 4, 2016. Webinars will be held on November 2 and 3, 2016. A copy of the draft and webinar registration can be accessed here. RCRC Comments: Staff is seeking input from member counties. RCRC Advocate: Mary Pitto mpitto@rcrcnet.org

Discussion Draft of Significant Effects and Hazards in the CEQA Guidelines. These proposed revisions specifically address the requirement to analyze hazards that a project may risk exacerbating and are in response to the California Supreme Court’s decision in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal. 4th 369. Agency: The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Status: Draft language released October 21, 2016, with comments due by November 21, 2016. A copy of the draft can be accessed here. RCRC Comments: Staff is seeking input from member counties. RCRC Advocate: Mary Pitto mpitto@rcrcnet.org